Nations Championship?
-
-
Welp some people don't like it, who have a better idea than me
-
Perhaps this could be used to give NZ players more money to keep them in NZ. If they somehow used the extra income to pay the players more it may help to get them interested.
It really needs some sort of relegation system but it will never happen because imagine if Scotland/France/Australia has a shocker and somehow end up in the bottom 2, it would be financial suicide for those unions the following year.
This also makes it extra hard for that end of year tour, imagine 5 hard games in a row for the eventual winner. I understand they want the money but perhaps a simple round robin would be better.
Each SH team, well the ones with a shot at the top 4 would have to take almost WC level squads to manage 5 games in a row.
Maybe do this like Euro in soccer where it is every 4 years which would be in between World Cups.
Did they say what happens to this tournament in World Cup years? Disregard, doesn't happen in WC years.
-
@Machpants said in World League Rugby:
Welp some people don't like it, who have a better idea than me
Read says ""Fans want to see meaningful games; they don't want to see fatigued players playing a reduced quality of rugby as part of a money-driven, weakened competition that doesn't work for the players and clubs."
Is he talking about the current June tests and the meaningless end of year tours or the new format?
-
Statement IRP (International Rugby Players):
PLAYERS HIGHLIGHT “MAJOR CONCERNS” AROUND PROPOSED INTERNATIONAL SEASON
The world’s top players have warned of serious “player welfare and integrity concerns” around World Rugby’s proposed competition structure for the global game. While senior players have consistently voiced their support for the concept, ongoing concerns exist around the detail of the competition format that has been taken to market in recent months. The International Rugby Players Council of almost 40 players spoke via conference call on Tuesday night (GMT) to discuss the potential 12-year deal, with nine of the world’s top ten international team captains dialing in. Senior players from around the globe were united in their concern about the proposed format, in relation to: * Player load challenges from multiple top-level test matches in different countries and time-zones in consecutive weeks * Increased long-haul travel in short time frames * A lack of real opportunities for Tier Two nations to progress * Increased conflicts between country and club demands and Regulation 9 release periods * Potential impact on Rugby World Cup and Lions tours * The long-term quality and integrity of the international game It’s believed that World Rugby bosses are seeking to ratify the deal in the coming weeks, which has raised concerns among the Player Council.Response: World Rugby Statement
World Rugby recognises and values the importance of player considerations and input into the annual international competition discussions. However, the manner the International Rugby Players (IRP) organisation has expressed these is surprising given regular engagement throughout this ongoing process. World Rugby’s commitment to player welfare matters is unwavering and we will continue to engage and give full consideration to the welfare of players within the ongoing discussions. It is inappropriate to comment on specifics whilst wider stakeholder consultation, including with IRP, is ongoing. However, it is important to note that some assumptions made in the statement regarding the proposed competition structure are inaccurate and that important matters such as playing load and emerging nation opportunities are at the heart of constructive dialogue on the overall concept. Consumer research confirms a structured annual competition would make fans and new audiences more likely to watch, attend and engage with international rugby, exposing the sport to new fans worldwide. There is also no doubt that a structured annual international competition would deliver significantly greater long-term global media revenue for reinvestment in the global game. This project has at its heart long-term growth and stability, not short-term wins, and that includes greater opportunity for players. As instructed by our Executive Committee and the Unions, we remain committed to a process of constructive dialogue with all stakeholders, including the IRP, to deliver a model that ensures the best-possible competition and commercial outcomes for all and a truly exciting and meaningful annual international competition structure that is great for players, clubs, fans and unions. -
@Stargazer said in World League Rugby:
Statement IRP (International Rugby Players):
PLAYERS HIGHLIGHT “MAJOR CONCERNS” AROUND PROPOSED INTERNATIONAL SEASON
Consumer research confirms a structured annual competition would make fans and new audiences more likely to watch, attend and engage with international rugby, exposing the sport to new fans worldwide. There is also no doubt that a structured annual international competition would deliver significantly greater long-term global media revenue for reinvestment in the global game. This project has at its heart long-term growth and stability, not short-term wins, and that includes greater opportunity for players.Not sure if I'm out of touch or not, but I'm of completely the opposite view. I've really enjoyed the 3-match end of season tours we've had from NH opposition last few years.
The very last thing I want to watch is us playing the same 11 teams every year.
-
That WR statement is so typical.
'We are surprised that the players have spoken in public about their concerns as we have always involved them and will continue to pay lip service to their concerns because this is our unwavering point of view which we will force on them...'
We will also have a situation whereby the NH fans will complain that their teams have to do a globe-trotting exercise at the end of their season because of the distances between games while the SH fans will complain that their teams have to play 5 tests during a period that they usually struggle with playing 3 or 4.
It is quite an unbalanced proposal as far as workload/flights etc etc goes which just leaves it open for the types of fan arguments that made the changes to Super Rugby a competition killer.
Ask fans if they would like to see a world comp and they would likely say yes.
Ask if they still want to see one that that wasn't balanced and they may have a different view.(hang on I think I got that from the Brexit thread
) -
Fuck this. I'll take what he says with a grain of salt but Nichols spoke well and very fairly on breaky radio today. The various national players unions and rep, plus their international team have been in talks for ages with WR around this. Sounds like they feel there is support for their position from national unions, but it's not getting traction at WR.
Nichols mentioned about 4-5 meetings to discuss this concept through 2018 and early this year, then noted they'd (player reps etc) had been excluded from the most recent meeting. Then they find out WR want to get it locked in asap and we start down this 'fake news', no, no, no you misunderstand our plans kind of messaging from Pichot.
To be fair Nichols said they are taking a partnership approach, better to be talking and listening to each other etc, but ultimately if the cattle ain't keen... (my words, not his).
Pichot is proving to be pretty fucking snakey imo. Will have to do some digging to see how many folks in the WR leadership team have held active roles at national level. Hmmm where is Amazon based again?? Surely that's just a co-inky-dink aye?!
-
one thing I heard Rob NIchol say - 5 matches on consecutive weekends in potentially 5 different country....
Yeah the players will be keen AF!
-
@barbarian said in World League Rugby:
@rotated No. But there needs to be some sort of middle ground between Tonga hosting six tests and the Pacific Island teams being locked out for 10 years while the USA and Japan get a full dance card of games each year.
Not to mention Georgia, Romania, Canada, Uruguay.
Current rankings have Fiji 9th, Georgia 12th.
States are at 13, Italy 15.
That 10th to 20thish band is what needs the investment.
-
@booboo plus WR need to really apply some pressure to sort out the shitty leadership and admin happening in some of the PI unions. If they are any chance to engage/negotiate with NH clubs v their best players they have to sort that shit out. Not to mention having their players getting paid for international duties. Otherwise 'poaching' will turn into a professional rugby welfare system, where there would be zero incentive for any island nation player to pursue international rugby for their nation.
-
@taniwharugby said in World League Rugby:
one thing I heard Rob NIchol say - 5 matches on consecutive weekends in potentially 5 different country....
Yeah the players will be keen AF!
The last 5 tests the All Blacks played were in a row with more travel than is proposed here. They played five in a row last season. As far back as 2008 they played 5 consecutive weekends and then 6 in 2009. This is the new normal. BTW - they used to these things called tours where they would play twice a week.
The ABs will do more travel to the Bledisloe fixture in Perth this year than they would do in five consecutive weekends in Europe.
-
@rotated depends on the quality of player required for the 5 weeks in a row though I guess...I mean playing Aus, SA, Argentina, England & IReland on consecutive weekends all over the show would be a much tougher ask than Aus & Japan in Japan and then onto Europe.
-
@taniwharugby said in World League Rugby:
@rotated depends on the quality of player required for the 5 weeks in a row though I guess...I mean playing Aus, SA, Argentina, England & IReland on consecutive weekends all over the show would be a much tougher ask than Aus & Japan in Japan and then onto Europe.
These are going to be played in brackets though right? So we will play the SH teams over what is now TRC period and the NH teams and final over what is EOYT. This proposal does not read as though we will be playing Italy in Rome one week and then Japan in Dunedin the next.
I do disagree with the concept of a semifinal though. It should be the top NH conference team vs top SH+USA+Japan team.
